Living Car Free - story of stuff - planned obsolescence

I noticed the other day that Aaron made reference to planned obsolescence in one of the threads, and it got me thinking about a link that was sent to me. The video is about 20 minutes long. It's very interesting and in my opinion, worth watching.

http://www.storyofstuff.com/

As carfree individuals, does planned obsolescence really ____ you off? And I don't just mean with respect to bikes and parts. I mean everything. And as consumers, are we really aware of it? Or do most of us not really care?

There's planned obsolescence and there's poor workmanship. Both of them disturb me because they both cost me money. Here are a few examples:

• My computer, six years old, is starting to show its limitations. It still runs very well, but there are a lot of software limitations I'm facing. I'm also having trouble on some Internet sites, even though I'm on high-speed. The processor isn't fast enough. The cost of a computer is significant. I'll have to plan for this purchase.

• My winter bike is around 20 years old. Part sizes that were common in the late 1980s are almost impossible to find now. Right now, it's not a problem but if I need to do some work on the headset, I'm in for a challenge. I could replace this bike, but again, I don't want to spend a lot of money on it. Besides, I like the design for a winter and commuting bike.

• I bought a printer/scanner a couple of years ago. It's causing problems but I can't get it repaired. I have to throw it out and replace it. Although it was a good brand name and worked well, the actual construction seemed flimsy. At work, we purchased a printer a few years ago. It didn't get a lot of use but today it's a large and expensive doorstop.

• I've seen some consumer electronics which are so poorly built they can only last a couple of years under mild regular use.

I regret the way that some great and unique products first become unavailable to buy, then become very hard to maintain for lack of compatible parts. You see this in bicycles of course, but also in electronics. One nice thing about the Internet is how people can get together to self-support some of the great older products, and how you can use it to find stuff that's no longer in production.

I can agree with a lot of whats said on there, but some stuff, like computers, have not seen planned obsolescence (well, maybe prebuilt ones like Dell and Apple with proprietary hardware have). For a novice user, it may seem so, computers, software, and the like have come soooo far in the past 20 years, the past 10 years, and even the past 5 years. It'd be ridiculous to have the same components for more than a few years if you want to be even close cutting edge or even stay with the pack. If you don't need to be, an older computer will work fine. A decent computer from 6-8 years ago upgraded with more RAM will suit more people fine, but if you need to use newer software like Adobe Illustrator or Photoshop and work on large projects, forget about it.

But all in all, a great video. Lays a lot out there I'll probably send this to a few people.

I can agree with a lot of whats said on there, but some stuff, like computers, have not seen planned obsolescence (well, maybe prebuilt ones like Dell and Apple with proprietary hardware have). For a novice user, it may seem so, computers, software, and the like have come soooo far in the past 20 years, the past 10 years, and even the past 5 years. It'd be ridiculous to have the same components for more than a few years if you want to be even close cutting edge or even stay with the pack. If you don't need to be, an older computer will work fine. A decent computer from 6-8 years ago upgraded with more RAM will suit more people fine, but if you need to use newer software like Adobe Illustrator or Photoshop and work on large projects, forget about it.

But all in all, a great video. Lays a lot out there I'll probably send this to a few people.

Obsolescence happens when something which still works is no longer practical to use because of its limitations. That happens all the time in the world of computers.

If you're using the latest version of a popular software program and I'm a few versions back, I may have trouble opening your document. This means I have to either upgrade my software or find a workaround solution. Most times, this will force me to upgrade, even if I don't want to do so, since the workarounds seldom work well. That's a form of obsolescence.

On the Internet, I'm seeing more and more web sites which require relatively recent software. These are sites with video and sites with animation added. If I'm not relatively current, there are places on the net which are closed to me. That's another form of obsolescence.

I upgraded my operating system a few years ago. To do this, I had to borrow a DVD drive to run the install disks since my computer doesn't have one. That was when System 10.4 came out for the Mac. If I want System 10.5, I can't install it on my computer since it's no longer supported. So far, this hasn't caused me trouble, but I'll soon notice it when software or add-ons will not work with anything less than the current version.

At my workplace, when we switched to newer application software for our page design work, we ended up replacing our computers as well. The new software wouldn't run on the older machines. The software is okay, but the old software had some great advantages I don't have any longer. And the new software has a few features I neither want nor need, but can't disable. The old machines, while still in good working order, could not be salvaged.

I noticed the other day that Aaron made reference to planned obsolescence in one of the threads, and it got me thinking about a link that was sent to me. The video is about 20 minutes long. It's very interesting and in my opinion, worth watching.

http://www.storyofstuff.com/

As carfree individuals, does planned obsolescence really ____ you off? And I don't just mean with respect to bikes and parts. I mean everything. And as consumers, are we really aware of it? Or do most of us not really care?

It is a great short film. I show it to my students. And its thesis is so blindingly obvious that I'm surprised that most people never, ever even think about it.

I noticed the other day that Aaron made reference to planned obsolescence in one of the threads, and it got me thinking about a link that was sent to me. The video is about 20 minutes long. It's very interesting and in my opinion, worth watching.

http://www.storyofstuff.com/

As carfree individuals, does planned obsolescence really ____ you off? And I don't just mean with respect to bikes and parts. I mean everything. And as consumers, are we really aware of it? Or do most of us not really care?

That film is depressing.

I think that in the computer world it isn't so much planned obsolescence as it is advancing technology...kind of like the difference between a 1914 Model T Ford and a 2007 Honda Civic. The computer technology just moved forward a lot faster than the automotive did. However I do agree it is frustrating to have something that won't work because it isn't backwards compatible (something the MicroCrap is infamous for) I have a real issue with purchasing a product, using it, wearing it out, then wanting to buy a similar replacement only to find that it doesn't exist in its original simpler form or the replacement is the "same" but a cheaply built copy. Most recent case was my electric razor. I have had a Braun 3612 that I have been using for over 7 years. I have been able to buy replacement parts fairly easily up until this past year. I cracked the housing on the razor just before Christmas this year. Finally found a replacement (same model number) but it is cheaply built and doesn't run nearly as well as the original. Time to look for a different brand/style I guess.

Aaron:)

Couldn't agree more. However I have some advice for those who are annoyed at computer obsolescence: switch to Linux. It'll be a headache until you get your documents converted to open formats and learn how to use the system, but from then on you'll be able to keep even the oldest computer working forever. I'm still using the same computer I bought for college (gulp 14 years ago), albeit with a networking card and CD drive it didn't come with. I helped my father resurect a computer he found in a dumpster using Unbutu.

The best part is that even though I've upgraded the version or flavor of Linux a few times the computer is still as fast as it ever was. Whereas with every new windows or mac machine I use, even though the amount of RAM and processor speed climbs ever higher, seems slower than the last.

One thing though: I purposefully don't by electronic gadgets to do things that a simpler mechanical gadget is just as good at. For example I use this razor http://www.kk.org/cooltools/archives/000979.php this thing is so well made my great grandchildren could be showing their kids how to use it.

Jeez, that was a major downer. I noticed they advise using a refillable coffee mug/thermos, however, even that has drawbacks. I bought one from Sbux, only to have them recall it a few months later. So much for trying to cut down on waste! *Sigh.*

...but if you need to use newer software like Adobe Illustrator or Photoshop and work on large projects, forget about it...Unless you need the new features, constant updating rarely makes much sense. A local computer magazine run a test a couple of years ago, where they did their own page layout on an ancient MacPlus vs. their normal Mac workstation. Both machines had latest possible OS and PageMaker. Both did the job, and in about the same time too.

I have an elderly relative who didn't want to replace his PowerMac 7300. I kept it running for him, just to see how much more service I could squeeze out of it. There were some considerations that limited the options (most notably he wouldn't consider any other OS, so BSD and Linux were out), but even so it run for years. Finally, I couldn't find a browser version that would be up to his bank's online service specs, and yet run on the old Mac OS. With that, the 7300 was retired to text processing. He now has a Mac Mini.

--J

Couldn't agree more. However I have some advice for those who are annoyed at computer obsolescence: switch to Linux...
Slackware Linux user here, since '95. Linux has its own inconveniences, but there's no planned obsolescence built in. Programs that were written as long ago as the '70s run just like they were intended. That's not important for the consumer market but it's great if you are a scientific or computing professional. If you want to write programs in any of a thousand computer languages, all the tools are free.

Unless you need the new features, constant updating rarely makes much sense.

I agree with you, but the problem is sharing projects with people who have the newer versions. At some point, you have to upgrade yourself so you can work with other people.

Whether computers are designed with planned obsolescence in mind, or they merely fall to the wayside because of technical/software advancements, this may be more difficult to eradicate than it appears. And I'm not picking issue with advancements that we have made over the years per se. It's just that some times things are just so shoddily built, it really makes you wonder if we've really advanced so far or not.

I've now lived in two major cities (Toronto and Vancouver) that have had problems with respect to where they are (will be) dumping their garbage/waste. They are running out of room and the general public may not seem to be aware of this, or care for that matter. Granted there may be a lot of things that are responsible for this, but really, is this just not a symptom of our priorities, or lack there of, in our society?

It just seems that with our current population, and our consumption of products and resources within this finite system, there will come a time when this will have to be addressed. And corporations shouldn't be allowed to shurk their responsibility. Sure they can say that they are only supplying what the market demands, but somewhere along the line, people/society/business have to start standing up and making choices with the bigger picture in mind - rather than just the health of the statement of operations/balance sheet.

Though some may find this depressing, I find it a positive thing. Acknowledging that we have a problem, is the first step towards actually correcting it. And the more people know, and are educated with respect to options and choices, the better off we will be.

And I think that as consumers, we have to shift our buying habits so that the marketplace will adjust to this new paradigm.

How we spend our money is how we vote on what exists in the world. I try to make decisions based on whether or not I want to contribute to a certain product, policy, or company's business practices.

I have to accept that electronics will be obsolete within a few years, or less. For that reason I don't buy or own a lot of tech gadgets, but a few essential (to me). I have a basic phone, a decent PC, an iPod, and an old digital camera. That's it.

On the other hand, for things that can, and should, last a long time, I buy the very best that I can afford. Things like hand tools, cookware, good furniture, knives, dishes, if I buy quality and take care of it I can hand them down to my grandkids someday.

Then there's that weird middle ground where it's all compromises. That's where bikes fall in. They don't last forever; parts wear out and have to be replaced. Every component is a compromise of durability, price, and performance. They don't ever wear out completely, as a whole, but they get to a point (which is different for everyone, depending on patience, finances, mechanical skills) where it's not worth the time and money investment to keep it running. Time to make compromises. A few things I own fall into this category, bikes of course, car, sewing machine, PC.

The only thing that I would completely give up on is the car, because I can't wrench it myself. The others I can. Auto work is insanely expensive, and I don't understand enough about how the things work to make sound decisions on maintenance and repairs. Ideally, by the time I have to make that decision about my current car I'll be at a position in my life where I can get rid of it without replacing it. It's funny that the car is the one consumer product I spend the most money on, and the thing I know the least about. No, not funny at all. A little disturbing, actually.

Though some may find this depressing, I find it a positive thing. Acknowledging that we have a problem, is the first step towards actually correcting it. And the more people know, and are educated with respect to options and choices, the better off we will be.

And I think that as consumers, we have to shift our buying habits so that the marketplace will adjust to this new paradigm.

Word.

I think that video, and this discussion, is more encouraging and inspiring than depressing.

Then there's that weird middle ground where it's all compromises. That's where bikes fall in. They don't last forever; parts wear out and have to be replaced. Every component is a compromise of durability, price, and performance. They don't ever wear out completely, as a whole, but they get to a point (which is different for everyone, depending on patience, finances, mechanical skills) where it's not worth the time and money investment to keep it running.


In these situations you donate parts to used bike shops that are still operative but you've lost patience with so people who don't mind imperfect stuff can use them.

Slackware Linux user here, since '95. Linux has its own inconveniences, but there's no planned obsolescence built in. Programs that were written as long ago as the '70s run just like they were intended. That's not important for the consumer market but it's great if you are a scientific or computing professional. If you want to write programs in any of a thousand computer languages, all the tools are free.
I think there may be a few users move to Linux after Microsoft's latest operating system...Vista. This is a new take on planned obsolescence. It is completely broken right from the get go... no need for any planning.

I can change the world, and I will lead by example.CE

I fixed that for you...:)

The old machines, while still in good working order, could not be salvaged.

Negative... just because your organization, or you personally couldn't use the machines doesn't make them worthless... I love old, retired computers... especially from mid-size companies.... they are SO easy to put to new uses... whether that be as non-GUI linux boxes (Servers, routers, etc), or with added memory and a fully functional Linux operating system. ;)

At my last position I took an old computer system that was slated to be recycled and turned it into a filtering firewall and router... it increased our security at least 10 fold, reduced trouble calls, and took me from having to format and reinstall about 2-3 computers a month to only having to do one in TWELVE months. Do you have any idea how many thousands of dollars that one 'worthless' computer saved the company? (It served for more than 2 and a half years as a router/firewall while I was there... and to my knowledge is still functioning to this day!)

Yup. Totally obsolete. ;)

I think that in the computer world it isn't so much planned obsolescence as it is advancing technology...kind of like the difference between a 1914 Model T Ford and a 2007 Honda Civic.


I have to disagree here... But, it depends on how you look at computers... if you're a Microsoft or Apple junkie, then planned obsolescence IS the name of the game.

Months before Vista came out Bill Gates was giving a presentation... one of the 'features' that he touted was that Vista would drive a whole new round of computer sales....

I have SERIOUS issues with a software company that advertises their product to the world as driving new hardware sales. :mad:

I have to disagree here... But, it depends on how you look at computers... if you're a Microsoft or Apple junkie, then planned obsolescence IS the name of the game.

Months before Vista came out Bill Gates was giving a presentation... one of the 'features' that he touted was that Vista would drive a whole new round of computer sales....

I have SERIOUS issues with a software company that advertises their product to the world as driving new hardware sales. :mad:

I have 2 points and a question:

1. Bikes do not necessarily have to fit into the planned obsolescence paradigm. Compared to almost all other consumer products, bikes are fairly permanent. Many people are still happily riding bikes built in the 1970s. My bike was built in the early 1990s, and I've already decided that I like the frame so much that I will keep it until I die, and just replace the components as they wear out. (Maybe that unbelieveably stupid handlebar gear shifter will need to go a bit sooner, though...)

2. Vista isn't that bad; I've not had any serious trouble with it. It does not appear to be much of an improvement over XP in any way, though, so I'm sort of wondering what the point is.

Okay, the question: I'm not a computer person. I use computers, and actually enjoy the technology on a very basic level, but I don't want to put a lot of time, energy or money into it. I believe the computing environment should be like central heating: it should work flawlessly when you want it to, and you shouldn't have to think about it all that much. I've never even seen Linux; is it an OS that can make this dream of mine a reality? Or should I continue to send bales of my hard-earned money to Redmond and Palo Alto?

Okay, the question: I'm not a computer person. I use computers, and actually enjoy the technology on a very basic level, but I don't want to put a lot of time, energy or money into it. I believe the computing environment should be like central heating: it should work flawlessly when you want it to, and you shouldn't have to think about it all that much. I've never even seen Linux; is it an OS that can make this dream of mine a reality? Or should I continue to send bales of my hard-earned money to Redmond and Palo Alto?

There is definitely a learning curve to them; it will take awhile before you are completely comfortable. And you may need to use google in order to do something like install new software. But
I think if you were to go with one of the flavors aimed at personal computing users, you would, after the initial break in period find yourself wondering why you hadn't switched before.

My suggestion to people who are thinking of trying it but really aren't sure, is to find a computer someone else considers trash and try it out on that before you nuke your windows box. That though is the big advantage of this OS, it can work on the newest or oldest computer hardware.

Either way you go you should switch to Open Office on whatever machine you are using. Microsoft purposefully stops allowing their office product to use the oldest versions of their own files. Redmond has made planned obsolesence something of an art form.

I have 2 points and a question:

1. Bikes do not necessarily have to fit into the planned obsolescence paradigm. Compared to almost all other consumer products, bikes are fairly permanent. Many people are still happily riding bikes built in the 1970s. My bike was built in the early 1990s, and I've already decided that I like the frame so much that I will keep it until I die, and just replace the components as they wear out. (Maybe that unbelieveably stupid handlebar gear shifter will need to go a bit sooner, though...)


I still have a bike that I bought in the mid 80's, and I was starting to have trouble finding parts. Tires, mainly, but I have no doubt there would be others if it needed more work.

I bought another about 3 years ago



2. Vista isn't that bad; I've not had any serious trouble with it. It does not appear to be much of an improvement over XP in any way, though, so I'm sort of wondering what the point is.

We do software development at work, and everyone hates Vista. Yes, they needed to do some security work to XP to reduce problems with viruses and all that, but the thing is such a bloated pig that I cannot fathom why people would want it. The same security features are ones that MacOS has had for years.


Okay, the question: I'm not a computer person. I use computers, and actually enjoy the technology on a very basic level, but I don't want to put a lot of time, energy or money into it. I believe the computing environment should be like central heating: it should work flawlessly when you want it to, and you shouldn't have to think about it all that much. I've never even seen Linux; is it an OS that can make this dream of mine a reality? Or should I continue to send bales of my hard-earned money to Redmond and Palo Alto?

It depends a lot on what you use the computer for, really.

+1 on the Linux machines! with open source software. I set up a 1990's Compaq Pressario laptop with Debian Linux and it ran circles around my brand new Dell D610. Unfortunately the motherboard has since gone Tango Uniform...Linux does take a bit of a learning curve but is well worth it IMHO.

As far as things like shaving...my preference is actually my Rolls Razor (http://www.geocities.com/RodeoDrive/3696/Intros02.html) (of which I have several), but electric is for convenience only, but given it's issues I may start using the Rolls more often. BTW parts and repairs are still available for a 60+ year old razor!:D

My taste in bicycles runs from the early 1900's tecnology (Sturmey-Archer hubs) thru about the mid 70's. After that it is primarily flash and dash type stuff. I haven't seen any great technology breakthroughs. And all the people that think aluminum is new to bikes...Caminade was building small production run bikes back in the 1930's. And IIRC wasn't the Bowden Space Liner made out of some form of plastic?;)

I really suspect the problems are A) Forced Consumerism and B) Greed (make it cheap and sell a bunch of them) I have a real tendency to look for the most durable product I can find even if the cost is two or three times what a disposable version would run. To me the worst problem with the cheap crap is the filling of landfills with thrown out stuff, the list is endless, as well the fact most of it is produced in a country that cares little about the environment and the damage they are causing.

Aaron:)

I still have a bike that I bought in the mid 80's, and I was starting to have trouble finding parts. Tires, mainly, but I have no doubt there would be others if it needed more work.


It all depends on what evolved to be standard sizes and parts compatibility. Some 80's bikes still meet modern parts fitting standards.

It all depends on what evolved to be standard sizes and parts compatibility. Some 80's bikes still meet modern parts fitting standards.
With a little creativity and persistence--and I do mean a little, it truly doesn't take much--parts can be found for anything. Updating my early 70's Raleigh with a new wheelset and drivetrain only required two NOS purchases off eBay (bottom bracket and cable housing stops). Not only is it an old bike, but it's lower end and a Raleigh, so it uses a lot of nonstandard parts and sizes. I can't imagine having that many problems finding parts for newer, better, more common bikes.

As carfree individuals, does planned obsolescence really ____ you off? And I don't just mean with respect to bikes and parts. I mean everything. And as consumers, are we really aware of it? Or do most of us not really care?

And surprisingly, the car industry may be one of the better industries as far as being able to maintain something and recycle it. Hot rodders got it started, but you can buy parts interchangeability manuals from Ford, GM etc. A window crank from an Impala will fit a Nova.

Wouldn't it be nice if bicycle manufacturers would do the same? If as bicyclists, we demand it, it will be provided. It's also possible that some individuals should come forward and provide a bicycle aftermarket parts. This is starting to happen, but it could go much bigger.

The schraeder valve was invented in 1891, and still used on car tires today.

I noticed the other day that Aaron made reference to planned obsolescence in one of the threads, and it got me thinking about a link that was sent to me. The video is about 20 minutes long. It's very interesting and in my opinion, worth watching.

http://www.storyofstuff.com/

As carfree individuals, does planned obsolescence really ____ you off? And I don't just mean with respect to bikes and parts. I mean everything. And as consumers, are we really aware of it? Or do most of us not really care?

Some consumers care, some don't. I used to buy American tools. I don't anymore. I can't find them for the most part. It's a choice that's been taken out of my hands.

The video was interesting, but the guilt-tripping was so strong that after 6 minutes I stopped it. I compare that to the videos of "Cadillac Desert" that explore just as outrageous a subject, but with enough humor to leaven it. I'll try to watch the rest later.

Okay, the question: I'm not a computer person. I use computers, and actually enjoy the technology on a very basic level, but I don't want to put a lot of time, energy or money into it. I believe the computing environment should be like central heating: it should work flawlessly when you want it to, and you shouldn't have to think about it all that much. I've never even seen Linux; is it an OS that can make this dream of mine a reality? Or should I continue to send bales of my hard-earned money to Redmond and Palo Alto?

If you have an old computer that you can use, I'd recommend trying Ubuntu linux... or if you don't, I believe they have a 'live CD' version you can download that is bootable and will give you a good feeling for it.

Ubuntu is very user friendly, and has a very easy to use software repository system that will easily cover all basic computer uses... including a decent selection of productivity software and games.

The biggest shortcoming that I personally find in Linux is support for new hardware (recently released stuff) and wireless adapters.

And surprisingly, the car industry may be one of the better industries as far as being able to maintain something and recycle it. Hot rodders got it started, but you can buy parts interchangeability manuals from Ford, GM etc. A window crank from an Impala will fit a Nova.

Wouldn't it be nice if bicycle manufacturers would do the same? If as bicyclists, we demand it, it will be provided. It's also possible that some individuals should come forward and provide a bicycle aftermarket parts. This is starting to happen, but it could go much bigger.

Daimler was the one who came up with the idea that if some parts can be used in several models of vehicle, it cuts down production cost dramatically, and also if the part can be recycled from older model and be used in the new ones, even better. Makes you think twice about the cars people are buying, they are not necessarily new.

Some consumers care, some don't. I used to buy American tools. I don't anymore. I can't find them for the most part. It's a choice that's been taken out of my hands.

The video was interesting, but the guilt-tripping was so strong that after 6 minutes I stopped it. I compare that to the videos of "Cadillac Desert" that explore just as outrageous a subject, but with enough humor to leaven it. I'll try to watch the rest later.

What type of tools? I may have a couple of sources for you. One that I buy my hand mechanic type tools from is Armstrong Tools part of the Dahner Group, and IIRC Crescent and Channel Lock are still US made, and of course Park Tools for the bicycle.

Aaron:)

To me the worst problem with the cheap crap is the filling of landfills with thrown out stuff, the list is endless, as well the fact most of it is produced in a country that cares little about the environment and the damage they are causing.

Aaron:)

Go ahead and say it: C-H-I-N-A. It's not right to be too disapproving, though. We (North Americans) still have a huge individual resource-use footprint compared to the average person in that supposedly evil country. Before we wail too loudly at the Chinese for driving up the price of resources we thought were exclusively our own, we need to peek in a mirror.

Go ahead and say it: C-H-I-N-A. It's not right to be too disapproving, though. We (North Americans) still have a huge individual resource-use footprint compared to the average person in that supposedly evil country. Before we wail too loudly at the Chinese for driving up the price of resources we thought were exclusively our own, we need to peek in a mirror.
+1

China and India are following the example we set. And now we are blaming them for supposedly starting the problem(s).

Daimler was the one who came up with the idea that if some parts can be used in several models of vehicle, it cuts down production cost dramatically, and also if the part can be recycled from older model and be used in the new ones, even better. Makes you think twice about the cars people are buying, they are not necessarily new.
A friend of mine, in the auto parts industry, tells me some parts were once standard sizes many years ago. The same part would fit numerous makes and models. Today, car makers each use their own sizes. Some have different sizes for each model and year. This means the part that would fit a 2001 model might not fit the same vehicle built in 2005.

+1

China and India are following the example we set. And now we are blaming them for supposedly starting the problem(s).

People are hopefully supposed to learn from other's mistakes...I know I do, but I guess that doesn't work when greed is involved. And history does have a way of repeating itself.


Aaron:)

People are hopefully supposed to learn from other's mistakes...I know I do, but I guess that doesn't work when greed is involved. And history does have a way of repeating itself.


Aaron:)

But how can we expect anyone else not to follow our example when we've spent years promoting it as the ideal? Why should we be surprised if people in other countries want the lifestyle we've touted to the rest of the world?

This reminds me of a few years ago, when North Americans were condemning Brazil for cutting down rainforests to provide grazing land for cattle. But in the 1700s and 1800s, the U.S. and Canada had already cut vast tracts of forest land for similar purposes. Why was it okay for us but not okay for Brazil?

The only way we can hope to be taken seriously in China and India today is if we truly make an effort to change our ways — to repent. It's not enough to talk about the potential problems, no matter how well we know the facts and arguments. We need to put our talk into action. And this action must come from more than just a dedicated minority.

I have no interest in starting a micro$oft/linux war, but have you compared the install requirements of a standard linux (say RedHat/Ubuntu) install compared to say... ten years ago? (comparing Vista/Win98 eras).

It's not exactly the lightweight OS that it used to be.

--------

Yes, the market it pushing things, but it's just as much about consumerism. Think about the new computer you bought ten years ago, how fast you thought it was, and the applications you were running on it. Now compare that to what you're doing with it today. I'd bet that not a whole hell of a lot has changed. Your emails still comes in, you still browse the internet, and even if you are using a higher-end graphics/cad/etc package, you're not getting any more work done that you were then (unless you're one of the top 1% of users).

Yea, screw M$ for changing the word format twice in that period... and screw web developers for using technologies that won't work in older browsers - but it's not the fault of any one group.

If I were going to blame anything though, it would be the ever-declining skill of the software developers. My current employer recently released a new version of their software. It has fewer features than the old one, and requires considerably more memory and processor, as well as forcing a database upgrade. To give you an idea, we regularly saw memory consumption in the 500-800MB range during the release copy stage.

So now, every new customer either has to already have new computers, or they have to go buy new ones to run the app.

People are hopefully supposed to learn from other's mistakes...I know I do, but I guess that doesn't work when greed is involved. And history does have a way of repeating itself.


Aaron:)


Greed is right. We've laid out a roadmap for anyone with enough money and influence to follow. It's hardly been a mistake from the corporate point of view.

The sad part about China is that the government seems to have sold out faster, and more completely than the US government did. I can't imagine what the world will be like when China is the primary (only?) superpower (I'm assuming the oil will last long enough for that to happen).

I have no interest in starting a micro$oft/linux war, but have you compared the install requirements of a standard linux (say RedHat/Ubuntu) install compared to say... ten years ago? (comparing Vista/Win98 eras).

It's not exactly the lightweight OS that it used to be.

--------


Redhat (It's Fedora, now, actually...) and Ubuntu will both run quite acceptably on a 4 or 5 year old computer... or even older! Try that with Vista. Vista won't run acceptably on a NEW computer that meets the minimum requirements. ;)

I ran Fedora on 1.8 Ghz celeron computer a friend of mine pulled out of a dumpster... ran quite acceptably till I gave it away.

I couldn't watch the video because the 10 year old computer I'm using doesn't do a good job with videos, even though there's a broadband connection. (That's an example of advancing technology, as others have pointed out.) But I think I've had a lot of similar thoughts on my own.

I used to have a backpack that worked well for 3 years. It was still functioning, but starting to look shabby, so I replaced it in August. The new pack was the same brand and model name, and cost a couple dollars less. It also had a lot of fancy straps, hooks and pockets that the old one lacked. Pretty cool, I thought at the time. But, as I'm sure most of you can guess, the plastic zipper broke less than 5 months after purchase, rendering it useless. That's planned obsolescence in two ways. First throw on a bunch of extra bells and whistles so gullible consumers (like me) will think they have to buy the "new" model. Then make it shoddy so it has to be replaced right away.

The economy has to "grow" at least three per cent a year or everybody gets cranky. Obsolescence keeps people buying crap they don't need--preferably on credit--to keep the machine turning. The politicians say it's our patriotic duty to spend more as consumers. We did it after 9/11, but we're currently starting to fall short on patriotic purchases. So of course Washington is printing up rebate checks right now to get us back on track with our spending, God bless 'em.

+1 on the Linux machines! with open source software. I set up a 1990's Compaq Pressario laptop with Debian Linux and it ran circles around my brand new Dell D610. Unfortunately the motherboard has since gone Tango Uniform...Linux does take a bit of a learning curve but is well worth it IMHO.

As far as things like shaving...my preference is actually my Rolls Razor (http://www.geocities.com/RodeoDrive/3696/Intros02.html) (of which I have several), but electric is for convenience only, but given it's issues I may start using the Rolls more often. BTW parts and repairs are still available for a 60+ year old razor!:D

My taste in bicycles runs from the early 1900's tecnology (Sturmey-Archer hubs) thru about the mid 70's. After that it is primarily flash and dash type stuff. I haven't seen any great technology breakthroughs. And all the people that think aluminum is new to bikes...Caminade was building small production run bikes back in the 1930's. And IIRC wasn't the Bowden Space Liner made out of some form of plastic?;)

I really suspect the problems are A) Forced Consumerism and B) Greed (make it cheap and sell a bunch of them) I have a real tendency to look for the most durable product I can find even if the cost is two or three times what a disposable version would run. To me the worst problem with the cheap crap is the filling of landfills with thrown out stuff, the list is endless, as well the fact most of it is produced in a country that cares little about the environment and the damage they are causing.

Aaron:)

+1 on the 'Rolls Razor' I have my granfathers he purchased while stationed in England before the Normandy invasion, use it often and it's traveled the world with me.

I had a real problem with this video..it started with the 'tank' to represent government, although she decided to use a 'people'.... okay that was way too political from the get go. Then starting off talking about raping the land and killing the animals..okay i had to turn it off at that point. Unfortunatly it was propaganda and not science or economics..i was dissapointed because there are some really important questions to be asked about our consumer society..I'm afraid allot of these people (well fed individuals, products of late 20th century, well to do societies) don't realize how huge the earth is, or the truly frightening forces of nature. They seem to have a guilt ridden view of humanity that makes us so powerful that we are destroyers of worlds, and like their 18th century Victorian counterparts we must be wise stewards of the planet and deny ourselves for the betterment of Gods creation...errr..well no. It'd take a new virus, asteroid or a couple of (around 6) volcanoes to go off and that would be the end of us.

I don't believe in waste but I do believe in people and science, maybe a little balance is in order.

Sorry to ramble but the first six minutes of that video really..really annoyed me I wanted to yell "go back to the Hamptons or Caltech and make protest posters with the rest of your 'concerned' friends and don't push your 'views' on me..read a technical book for God's sake!"

Sorry.. :)

Finally.. if someone was teaching this to my kid, I'd be definatly having a talk to the schools principle about politics over education.

I had a real problem with this video..it started with the 'tank' to represent government, although she decided to use a 'people'.... okay that was way too political from the get go. Then starting off talking about raping the land and killing the animals..okay i had to turn it off at that point. Unfortunatly it was propaganda and not science or economics..i was dissapointed because there are some really important questions to be asked about our consumer society..I'm afraid allot of these people (well fed individuals, products of late 20th century, well to do societies) don't realize how huge the earth is, or the truly frightening forces of nature. They seem to have a guilt ridden view of humanity that makes us so powerful that we are destroyers of worlds, and like their 18th century Victorian counterparts we must be wise stewards of the planet and deny ourselves for the betterment of Gods creation...errr..well no. It'd take a new virus, asteroid or a couple of (around 6) volcanoes to go off and that would be the end of us.

I don't believe in waste but I do believe in people and science, maybe a little balance is in order.

Sorry to ramble but the first six minutes of that video really..really annoyed me I wanted to yell "go back to the Hamptons or Caltech and make protest posters with the rest of your 'concerned' friends and don't push your 'views' on me..read a technical book for God's sake!"

Sorry.. :)

Finally.. if someone was teaching this to my kid, I'd be definatly having a talk to the schools principle about politics over education.

Yes, the tone of the lady in the video is pretty annoying, but that doesn't take away the truth of her message, and what a clear, concise message it is (too many people consuming too much with too little regard for the consequences). I do teach this to kids, and dammit, it's not political. It's the reality on the ground. I'm old enough to remember $1.00/gal gas. The population of my home state has quadrupled since I was in high school, and the landscape has gone to **** before my eyes. And this is happening even more rapidly in other parts of the world. We have 6 billion people on Earth, and counting, most of whom would love to have a standard of living equal to that of the West, and who can blame them, but with these numbers it's never gonna happen. Get your head out of the sand. Do you really think that the math will change just because it doesn't agree with your political views?

Sorry, but people like you, and the idea that you can fight propaganda with science are part of the reason we're in this mess.

Most people, for some reason, think scientists have some hidden agenda to everything, so they're skeptical from the start. What's more is that they can't understand the science if it's presented to them.

How many times have we seen people in this forum say the equivalent of "I'm not going to keep driving until you prove to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that it's hurting the environment". Sorry, but if someone won't/can't concede the obvious, you're not going to turn them around with an analysis of auto emissions on the Brazilian rainforest.

I'm not saying that this wasn't fluff, because it was. If this fluff were to appear on television (oh the irony) it would go as far or further towards changing behavior than anything else.

The corporations have been doing this for years. That's why evolution, global warming, dying oceans, etc are all just "theories" to so many people.

Sorry, but people like you, and the idea that you can fight propaganda with science are part of the reason we're in this mess.

Most people, for some reason, think scientists have some hidden agenda to everything, so they're skeptical from the start. What's more is that they can't understand the science if it's presented to them.

How many times have we seen people in this forum say the equivalent of "I'm not going to keep driving until you prove to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that it's hurting the environment". Sorry, but if someone won't/can't concede the obvious, you're not going to turn them around with an analysis of auto emissions on the Brazilian rainforest.

I'm not saying that this wasn't fluff, because it was. If this fluff were to appear on television (oh the irony) it would go as far or further towards changing behavior than anything else.

The corporations have been doing this for years. That's why evolution, global warming, dying oceans, etc are all just "theories" to so many people.
It's hard to know where to aim the message.

Like you imply, scientific arguments don't work in a country where most people think that greedy scientists, mad for grant money, are the masterminds of a vast conspiracy to fool and fleece the public. A plot that, praise God, is valiantly fought against by the honest and selfless tele-evangelists and right wing AM radio prophets.

Theological arguments aren't much more effective when 96 % of the people call themselves Christians, yet half those self-described Christians believe in the literal truth of the Jewish Bible, while simultaneously believing in pagan astrology and Hindu reincarnation (according to a couple recent polls). I really don't think cafeteria style fundamentalism is conducive to reason and analysis.

i was dissapointed because there are some really important questions to be asked about our consumer society

What questions would you ask?


They seem to have a guilt ridden view of humanity that makes us so powerful that we are destroyers of worlds, and like their 18th century Victorian counterparts we must be wise stewards of the planet and deny ourselves for the betterment of Gods creation...errr..well no.

I think you may be missing the point that she was trying to make about finite resources. Granted her style and approach may have been annoying and irratating, and that could possible just turn people off to the message.

Do you not think, it would be in our best interests to be diligent stewards with respect to our environment?


It'd take a new virus, asteroid or a couple of (around 6) volcanoes to go off and that would be the end of us.

So in the meantime it's business as usual?


I don't believe in waste but I do believe in people and science, maybe a little balance is in order.

How is it that you believe in people? Please elaborate because I really don't know what you're getting at?

And you believe in science? Do you suscribe to any of the projected time frames put forth from peak oil? Do you believe in peak oil?

It's alarming how much of our life and economy is tied to oil. This is a finite resource. Well, actually I guess not. One only has to wait a few million years for the carbon to come full circle again.

This is the point that I felt she was trying to get across.

I would be interested to hear what you think we should be telling the 6 billion plus people, with respect to consumption and resources. And furthermore, what measures should we take to ensure there is something left for future generations? Or is this inconsequential in the scheme of things?

Obsolescence happens when something which still works is no longer practical to use because of its limitations. That happens all the time in the world of computers.
Sure, but it isn't PLANNED obsolescence. You don't HAVE to toss out the computers, you just WANT to. Lots of people still use computers made fifteen years ago and do fine, they are still supported in many ways, they're durable and made to last, and as long as you don't want to use flashy stuff that requires capabilities that were not physically possible and were ten times the "theoretical limit" of what a computer could do when the computer was built with the absolute newest technology of the time you're fine.
PLANNED obsolescence is when you make your products shoddy pieces of crap because when they break down, you'll be releasing a new flashy model with a stylish paint job and cool bells and whistles that otherwise functions pretty much the same and works at a similar standard to the existing old stuff.

If you have an old computer that you can use, I'd recommend trying Ubuntu linux... or if you don't, I believe they have a 'live CD' version you can download that is bootable and will give you a good feeling for it.
They do. I've been using Ubuntu exclusively for over a year. the native games are mostly garbage, but it runs great. Xubuntu (the low resources version) apparently runs on systems down to 64MB of memory, though 128MB is recommended. It's a free download and you can play with it on the CD. It seems confusing for a bit but it's not any more confusing than Windows; think of it as the difference between riding a USS bent and a DF roadie. If you learned the USS as a child, the DF is going to be a pain to figure out.